Saturday, March 22, 2014

The Question of Minorities - part 3: Partition era migration of Hindus from East Pakistan

Pro-Indian agents, who
never accepted the partition of India, claim that some 5.3 million Hindus had
left East Pakistan between 1947 and 1971. Not only do they fail to share any
credible source for such claims but they are also delinquently silent about the
exodus figures of Muslims from India in the same period to Pakistan.[i] As noted by credible
scholars, Indian statistics on such contentious matters were "not
merely guesses”, 'but frequently demonstrably absurd guesses'.[ii]
My concern in this article is with statistics relating to migration of people
during the partition. As we shall see below unreliable statistics, let alone
politicized claims with ulterior motives on such important issues, gravely
impairs our judgment and only breeds mistrust and animosity between communities.

So, how many people did
migrate between Pakistan and India? As I have noted elsewhere,
in terms of mere size and rapidity, the Partition of British India
to Pakistan and India in August of 1947 constitutes perhaps the largest example
of voluntary and involuntary population movement in modern history. In the
pre-partition Bengal, there were 5 divisions which were subdivided into a total
of 28 districts, and that almost theentirepopulation in Bengal waseitherHinduorMuslim, apartfromabout3percent“Tribal”:55percentMuslimand 42percentHindu.[iii]
[Note: The Hindu % in Bengal in 1931, 1941 and 1951 was 42.3, 41.2 and 42.4,
while the Muslim % in the same period was 55.8, 55.7 and 56.4, respectively. In
the same period, the tribal % was recorded as 1.8, 3.1 and 1.2, respectively. It
goes without saying that the unusually high growth rate (e.g., more than
doubling from 896,000 to 1,849,000) of the tribal population in a 10-year
period between 1931 and 1941 simply cannot be explained by any natural growth
phenomenon, and points to mis- or cross-categorization, and/or massive
relocation into Bengal from other regions, including parts of Burma. The
average annual growth rates amongst Hindus and Muslims in Bengal in 1931-1941
were 1.6% and 1.85%, respectively.]

Year =>

1931

1941

1951

Total in millions =>

48.811

%

58.838

%

61.653

%

Hindu

20.670

42.3%

24.244

41.2%

26.128

42.4%

Muslim

27.245

55.8%

32.745

55.7%

34.789

56.4%

Tribals

0.896

1.8%

1.849

3.1%

0.736

1.2%

Estimates of migrants to Pakistan and India between 1947 and
1951 vary between 10 and 17 million, while estimates of deaths associated with
Partition range from 200,000 to over a million.[iv] Of these migrants, only
about 3 million crossed the border in the eastern sector of what was once
British India.

A further barrier to isolating the effects of Partition is the
Bengal famine of 1943 when according to Professor Amartya Sen some 3 million
people might have died. However, as we see from the table below the actual
figure is probably 3 times as large (anywhere from 6.8 million to 9.3 million).
[Note: the lower famine casualty figure omits ‘tribal’ data with abnormally
high annual growth rate.]

Population

in
1000’s

1931

%
avg. annual growth rate (‘31-‘41)

1941

%
avg. annual growth rate (’41-’51)

1951

Expected
population in 1951

Potential
1943 famine casualty

Bengal
Male

Total

25338

2

30954

0.52

32583

37815

5232

Hindu

10813

1.82

12970

0.72

13941

15557

1616

Muslim

14060

1.92

17039

0.69

18263

20649

2386

Tribals

465

7.35

945

-0.0875

379

1609

1230

Bengal
Female

Total

23473

1.72

27884

0.43

29070

33124

4054

Hindu

9857

1.34

11274

0.78

12187

12894

707

Muslim

13185

1.75

15706

0.51

16526

18709

2183

Tribals

431

7.70

904

-0.089

357

1521

1164

While the population of Bengal as a whole
for both males and females grew, it grew more than one percent more slowly
between 1941 and 1951 than between 1931 and 1941. This reduction in growth rate
had much to do with the 1943 Famine. Both religious communities experienced
reduced growth rates, but the reductions were larger for Muslims than for
Hindus, and were least for Hindu females. [See http://drhabibsiddiqui.blogspot.com/
for detail analysis, and data.]

Then there is also the question about the
reliability of the census data further complicating the issue. In 1941 Britain
was at war against Japan that had captured Burma, and the Burmese Buddhist
population collaborated with the Fascist Japanese Imperial forces and carried
out an extermination and eviction campaign against non-Buddhist population that
were racially Indian and considered an ally of the British. Many Indians
working in Burma were killed and many others fled as a result of the war, which
lasted for six years (1939-45). Could the above average growth rate in 1931-41 amongst
Muslims in districts like Chittagong (e.g., 2.4% among males) and Noakhali
(e.g., 3% overall), the two districts that are closer to Arakan in Burma, be a
direct result of the World War II?

East Bengal Demography in thousands

District

Sex

Religion

Population (1931)

% Annual Growth Rate (1931-41)

Population (1941)

Noakhali

Male

Muslim

671

3.3

931

Noakhali

Male

Hindu

187

1.2

212

Noakhali

Female

Muslim

668

2.7

873

Noakhali

Female

Hindu

179

1.1

201

Chittagong

Male

Muslim

641

2.4

817

Chittagong

Male

Hindu

195

1.8

234

Chittagong

Female

Muslim

686

1.4

788

Chittagong

Female

Hindu

197

1.3

224

West Bengal Demography in thousands

District

Sex

Religion

Population (1931)

% Annual Growth Rate (1931-41)

Population (1941)

Howrah

Male

Muslim

137

1.6

162

Howrah

Male

Hindu

469

3

632

Howrah

Female

Muslim

107

1.5

134

Howrah

Female

Hindu

391

2.8

520

Could the highly unusual 3% growth rate amongst Hindus in Howrah
in 1931-41 be similarly attributed to the same reason, i.e., World War II? Or,
was it due to undercounting in 1931? Nor should we ignore the importance of
major cities to attract people for jobs. However, for Howrah, the Muslim
population between 1931 and 1941 grew by only 1.5%, which is half the growth
rate amongst Hindus. As such, this unusual growth rate amongst Hindus could not
have been due to jobs but for some other factor(s). Dhaka’s (Dacca) population,
on the other hand, grew in the same period for both Hindus and Muslims by 1.9%
and 2.2%, respectively, which seems quite reasonable for a major city in East
Bengal towards attracting all for jobs there.

District

Sex

Religion

(1931)Population (thousands)

Growth Rate

(1941)Population
(thousands)

Dacca

Male

Muslim

1168

2.2

1453

Dacca

Male

Hindu

569

2.1

699

Dacca

Female

Muslim

1125

2.1

1388

Dacca

Female

Hindu

556

1.7

661

An
Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Harvard University-funded study (hereinafter referred
to as the Mellon Report), entitled “The Demographic Impact of Partition:
Bengal in 1947”that was jointly
collaborated between MIT, Harvard, Johns Hopkins and Fordham Universities in
2003 has shown that in Punjab, where the bulk of Partition related
migration was over by the end of 1947, migration of Bengali Hindus to India and
of Bengali and Urdu speaking Muslims to East Pakistan continued through 1951
and beyond further complicating the problem around reliable figures.[v] It says, “Bengal as a whole was little affected by Partition-related
moves: the movement from East Pakistan into Assam was probably largely from the
district of Sylhet, that had not been part of Bengal prior to Partition. West
(Indian) Bengal gained about 1.4 million migrants, whereas East Pakistan lost a
similar number.”

Most
of the cross-border migration in 1947 happened in the western front. In 1941, in only four Punjab districts was the population more
than two-thirds Hindu; in 12 districts the population was more than two-thirds
Muslim; no district was majority Sikh; in only three districts was the population
less than 28 per cent Muslim. By 1951, eight districts were more than
two-thirds Hindu; all 15 of the districts that became part of Pakistan were
more than 90 per cent Muslim; three districts were majority Sikh; and only one
district that remained in India had more than 2.5 per cent Muslim population.

As to the case of Bengal, the Mellon Report
continues, “Nothing remotely similar happened in Bengal, where the biggest
change at the district level was the outflow of Hindus from Dacca district,
reducing the proportion Hindu from 32 percent in 1941 to 21 percent in 1951.”
This observation is understandable given the fact that Dhaka became the capital
of East Pakistan in 1947, and many Muslims, including the Mohajirs (refugees)
from India, gravitated to the capital city for a plethora of reasons including
working in government sectors. On the other hand, the entire Hindu community was opposed
to the partition of India, and felt that it would lose the privileged status
that it had hitherto enjoyed in British India by continuing to live in what
became East Pakistan.

It
is worth noting here the strong opposition that came from famous Bengali Hindu
luminaries like Rabindranath Tagore who some 40 years before Pakistan became a
reality had strongly opposed the division of Bengal (1905), let alone the
establishment of Dacca University (once known as the “Oxford of the East”) in
East Bengal in 1921. Unlike the Hindus, who all supported undivided India,
Muslims in British India were split on the Pakistan issue, and many Muslims,
especially the prosperous ones, living in mainland India decided against
migration and stayed in India. Even then, there was a net decrease in the
number of Muslims living in 1951 (compared to 1941) in some of the districts of
West Bengal, esp. in Howrah; the trend was just the opposite in most of East Pakistan,
esp. in Dhaka, where there was a net decrease in Hindu population.

So,
it is not difficult to see the impact of the partition – the proportion of
Hindus in East Pakistan shrank considerably.The Mellon Report says, “In theperiod1941to1951,theHindu
populationsofEastBengaldistrictsallcontract,thoughbyveryvariableamounts,whereastheHindupopulationsofWestBengaltendto growsomewhatfasterthan1931to1941,aswouldbeexpectedgiventhemigrationofover2millionpeople,presumablypredominantlyHindu,fromEastBengalintoWestBengal.TheMoslem
[sic] populationsofEastBengaltendtogrowmoreslowlybetween1941and1951thanintheearlierperiod,asdid theMoslem[sic] populationsofWestBengal...
Thesepatterns ofgrowthsuggestamore substantialrelocationoftheHindupopulationaboutthetimeofPartitionthanoftheMoslem [sic] population.” (p. 18)

The
Mellon Report analyzed the demographic data for the aforementioned 7 districts
of West Bengal and 9 districts of East Bengal. In those districts, the total
number of Hindus and Muslims are tabulated below, showing that the net Hindu
and Muslim gains were, respectively, 191,000 and 1,443,000 in 1941-1951 in what
was once used to be known as joint Bengal. Noting that the pre-partition Bengal
had a Muslim majority (55%, compared to 42% Hindus and 3% tribals), this disproportionate
net gain among the Muslims could not have happened without a massive migration
of non-Bengali Muslims to East Pakistan.

Population in thousands

1931

1941

1951

Net Gain (1941-1951)

West Bengal

Hindu

7753

8727

10349

1622

Muslim

1995

2358

2343

-15

East Bengal (East Pakistan)

Hindu

6124

7024

5593

-1431

Muslim

16462

20058

21516

1458

A Chi-square test to check for association
between religious communities with census year showed that while the loss in
religious minority numbers in both East Pakistan and West Bengal was
statistically significant in 1951, the situation in Punjab was worse. As can
also been seen the total number of cross-border migration of Muslims and Hindus
to and from East Pakistan (1947-1951) possibly could not have been more than 3
million.

The Report concludes “Bengal remained quite
heterogeneous in terms of religion in 1951. The second feature is the very low
growth of the population of Bengal in the 1940s relative to its growth in the 1930s:
had 1931-41 growth rates continued between 1941 and 1951, the population of Bengal
as a whole would have been nearly 9 million larger than it actually was in
1951. This excess loss cannot be explained by net out-migration, since our
analysis suggests that Bengal as a whole was little affected by net migration
in 1947 and thereafter. Given the relatively small scale of migration, it is
unlikely that this population loss resulted from violence at the time of
Partition; it is a grim reminder of the magnitude of the disastrous Bengal
famine of 1943.”

My statistical analysis of the census data
agrees with the findings of the Andrew Mellon Foundation and Harvard University-funded
study and shows that there is no truth to the exaggerated claims made by
certain quarters about millions of Hindus migrating out of the then East
Pakistan as a result of partition of British India.

==========

Appendix: Tables on population demography

1, West Bengal Demography in '000s

District

Sex

Religion

Population 1931

%Growth Rate

Population 1941

%Growth Rate

Population 1951

Burdwan

Male

Muslim

152

1.5

177

0.4

183

Burdwan

Male

Hindu

639

1.4

737

2.7

969

Burdwan

Female

Muslim

140

1.3

160

-0.1

159

Burdwan

Female

Hindu

600

0.9

657

2.8

866

Birbhum

Male

Muslim

126

1.3

143

0

144

Birbhum

Male

Hindu

317

0.8

344

1.4

394

Birbhum

Female

Muslim

127

1.3

144

-0.1

143

Birbhum

Female

Hindu

319

0.7

342

1.1

381

Bankura

Male

Muslim

26

0.9

29

0.8

31

Bankura

Male

Hindu

506

0.8

546

1

605

Bankura

Female

Muslim

25

0.9

27

0

27

Bankura

Female

Hindu

505

0.5

533

1.1

597

Midnapore

Male

Muslim

108

1.4

125

0.1

126

Midnapore

Male

Hindu

1263

0.9

1376

1.4

1575

Midnapore

Female

Muslim

105

1.5

122

-0.6

114

Midnapore

Female

Hindu

1230

0.6

1306

1.4

1508

Hooghly

Male

Muslim

97

1.5

113

-0.7

106

Hooghly

Male

Hindu

489

1.8

587

2

716

Hooghly

Female

Muslim

83

1.2

94

0.7

101

Hooghly

Female

Hindu

435

0.6

462

3.1

628

Howrah

Male

Muslim

137

1.6

162

-1.3

143

Howrah

Male

Hindu

469

3

632

1.6

744

Howrah

Female

Muslim

107

1.5

134

-1.3

118

Howrah

Female

Hindu

391

2.8

520

1.5

601

Murshidabad

Male

Muslim

379

1.2

465

0.3

477

Murshidabad

Male

Hindu

295

1.6

346

2

391

Murshidabad

Female

Muslim

383

1

463

0.2

471

Murshidabad

Female

Hindu

295

1.4

339

1.9

374

2. East Bengal Demography in '000s

District

Sex

Religion

Population 1931

%Growth Rate

Population 1941

%Growth Rate

Population 1951

Rangpur

Male

Muslim

955

1.1

1068

1.4

1224

Rangpur

Male

Hindu

395

0.9

430

-3.3

308

Rangpur

Female

Muslim

140

1.1

160

1.1

159

Rangpur

Female

Hindu

600

0.6

657

-2.9

490

Bogra

Male

Muslim

461

1.6

540

0.6

575

Bogra

Male

Hindu

95

0.6

100

-1.7

84

Bogra

Female

Muslim

445

1.5

518

0.4

540

Bogra

Female

Hindu

83

0.5

87

-1.2

78

Pabna

Male

Muslim

570

1.7

674

0.2

689

Pabna

Male

Hindu

168

1.6

197

-4.1

131

Pabna

Female

Muslim

542

1.7

640

-0.1

636

Pabna

Female

Hindu

164

1.3

186

-3.9

127

Dacca

Male

Muslim

1168

2.2

1453

1.6

1699

Dacca

Male

Hindu

569

2.1

699

-4.8

435

Dacca

Female

Muslim

1125

2.1

1388

0.9

1513

Dacca

Female

Hindu

556

1.7

661

-4.9

405

Mymensingh

Male

Muslim

2034

1.7

2410

0.4

2518

Mymensingh

Male

Hindu

619

1.2

696

-3.4

496

Mymensingh

Female

Muslim

1894

1.7

2255

0.1

2277

Mymensingh

Female

Hindu

555

0.8

601

-2.9

451

Bakerganj

Male

Muslim

1078

2

1322

1.4

1516

Bakerganj

Male

Hindu

416

1.8

497

-2.9

373

Bakerganj

Female

Muslim

1027

1.9

1245

1

1382

Bakerganj

Female

Hindu

396

1.5

462

-3

344

Tippera

Male

Muslim

1210

2.4

1541

0.4

1604

Tippera

Male

Hindu

384

1.7

457

-2.4

360

Tippera

Female

Muslim

1147

2.3

1435

0.3

1482

Tippera

Female

Hindu

366

1.5

423

-2.1

342

Noakhali

Male

Muslim

671

3.3

931

0.8

1006

Noakhali

Male

Hindu

187

1.2

212

-1.2

188

Noakhali

Female

Muslim

668

2.7

873

0.4

909

Noakhali

Female

Hindu

179

1.1

201

-1.7

170

Chittagong

Male

Muslim

641

2.4

817

1.6

957

Chittagong

Male

Hindu

195

1.8

234

-0.2

230

Chittagong

Female

Muslim

686

1.4

788

0.5

830

Chittagong

Female

Hindu

197

1.3

224

-0.9

205

[i]http://www.voiceofdharma.org/books/tfst/appii1.htm
mentions 4.45 million Hindus and not 5.3 million. Even that source is
unreliable. It also quotes an article in the Weekly Holiday (The Missing
Population, Holiday, Weekly, Dhaka, 7 January 1994) by Mohiuddin Ahmed,
which is unreliable, stating that some 2 million Hindus had left Bangladesh
between 1974 and 1991.

[ii] See,
e.g., comments made in the book “Development
Economics on Trial: The Anthropological Case for a Prosecution” by Polly Hill,
Cambridge University Press (1986), p. 44; see also the works of Dewey and
Charlesworth on Indian statistics as referenced in the above book. See also the
article: “The Poor Quality of Official Socio-economic Statistics Relating to
the Rural Tropical World: With Special Reference to South India” by Polly Hill,
Modern Asian Studies, 18, 3 (1984), pp. 491-514, http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/312264?uid=3739864&uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=21103548611091

Health;
2 Department of Sociology, Fordham University; 3 Program on Humanitarian Crises
and Human Rights, Francois-Xavier Bagnoud Center on Health and Human Rights,
Harvard School of Public Health; 4 Center for International Studies,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Followers

About Me

I have a long history of a peaceful activist in my effort towards improving human rights and creating a just and equitable world. I have written extensively in the arena of humanity, global politics, social conscience and human rights since 1980, many of which have appeared in newspapers, magazines, journals and the Internet. I have tirelessly championed the cause of the disadvantaged, the poor and the forgotten here in Americas and abroad. Commenting on my articles, others have said, "His meticulously researched essays and articles combined with real human dimensions on the plight of the displaced peoples of Rohingya in Myanmar, Chechnya, Bosnia, Kosovo and Palestine, and American Muslims in the post-9/11 era have made him a singular important intellectual offering a sane voice with counterpoints to the shrill threats of the oppressors and the powerful. He offers a fresh and insightful perspective on a whole generation of a misunderstood and displaced people with little or no voice of their own." I have authored 13 books, 10 of which are now available through the Amazon.com.